that the uniform defign of its doctrines, precepts, promifes and threatnings, is to promote the caufe of virtue and righteousness in the world, and to reclaim men from vice and wickednefs; it is certainly very unreafonable and unfair to make Chriftianity anfwerable for the abufes and corruptions it condemneth. If every thing must be rejected which hath been abused, government and civil polity, knowledge and literature, religion, liberty, and reason itself must be difcarded.

One of the most remarkable things in the tract we are now confidering is, that the author will not allow that the moral precepts of Chriftianity properly belong to it at all, or make any part of the Chriftian religion. He pretends, that Chriftian divines, in order to render Chriftianity amiable, have decked her with the graceful ornaments of moral precepts; whereas in Chriftianity the moral precepts are but borrowed ware, the property of the deifs, and as much diftinguished from Chriftianity, as Chriftianity is from Mahometanism. Thus he hath found cut an admirable expedient to flrip Chriflianity of what hath been hitherto efleemed one of its principal glories. The holy and excellent precepts which the great Author of our religion taught and enjoined in the name of God, and to enforce which by the moit weighty and important motives was one great defign of his and his apoftles' miniftry, do not, it feems, belong to Chriftianity at all. Moral precepts, according to this writer, make no part of divine revelation, and of the fcheme of religion delivered in the Gospel; though to clear and fhew them in their juft extent, and enforce them by a divine authority, and by the most prevailing motives, feems to be one of the nobleft ends for which a divine revelation could be given to mankind. Suppofing, which was really the cafe, that the world was funk into an amazing darkness and corruption, there was nothing that was more wanted than to have a pure fyftem of morals, containing the whole of our duty with refpect to God, our neighbours, and ourfeives, delivered not as the opinions of wife men and philofophers, but as the laws of God himself, and enforced by all the fanctions of a divine authority, and by all the charms of the divine grace and goodnefs. This is what hath been done by the Chriftian revelation; and its great usefulness to this purpose, and the need the world flood in of it, is excellently reprefented by Mr. Locke,

Locke, in his Reasonableness of Chriftianity*, quoted at large by Dr. Benfon in his remarks on this pamphlet, who very justly obferves, that this great man had fully obviated before-hand all that the author of Deifm fairly Stated hath advanced on this fubject.

The laft argument he urgeth against the Chriftian revelation is drawn from its not having been univerfally spread in all ages and nations. I fhall not fay any thing here to this objection, which hath been often repeated and anfwered. It had been particularly infifted upon by Dr. Tindal, and was fully confidered in the answers that were made to him. Some notice was taken of it in the obfervations on Lord Herbert's fchemet. And it may be obferved, as Mr. Chubb himfelf feems to think, that no great Arefs fhould be laid upon it; and he will not take upon him to affirm, that the non-univerfality of a revelation is a juft objec‐ tion against its divinity ‡.

Soon after Deifm fairly Stated, &c. appeared, Dr. Benfon published animadverfions upon it, in the fecond edition of the Reafonableness of Chriftianity as delivered in the Scriptures, London, 1746: To which there is added an appendix, in which he folidly vindicates the arguments he had offered in his Reafonablenefs of Chriflianity, &c. against the exceptions of this writer, and charges him not only with falfe reafonings, but with grofs mifrepresentations. The fame charge is urged against him in a tract published by the reverend Mr. Capel Berrow, though without his name, intitled, Deifm not confiftent with the Religion of Nature and Reafon:-" wherein are obviated the most popu"lar objections brought againft Chriftianity, thofe especially "which are urged by a moral philofopher, in a late extraordinary pamphlet, ftyled Deifm fairly Stated, and fully Vindicated, in a letter to a friend-London, 1751." There were other anfwers to Deifm fairly Stated, which I have not feen. I fhall conclude my reflections upon it with obferving, that this pamphlet furnishes remarkable inftances to verify the obfervation I had occafion to make before concerning the unfair conduct of the deifical writers, and the ftrange liberties they take in mifreprefenting the fense of the Chriftian writers whom they quote.

66

* Locke's Works, vol. ii. p. 575-579. 4th edit.

See above, p. 20, & feq.

Chubb's pofthumous Works, vol. i. p. 218, 219. $ See above, let. vii, p. 9o. note.

It

It may not be improper here to take fome notice of the attempt made against the authority of the facred writings in the late Lord Bolingbroke's Letters on the Study and Ufe of Hiftory. In fome of thefe letters he hath used his utmost efforts to fubvert the credit of the fcripture hiftory; but the method he has made ufe of to this purpofe feems not to be well chofen, nor confiftent with itfelf. A principal reafon which his Lordship produces to invalidate the credit and authority of the Old Teslaanent hiftory is, that the Greeks were not acquainted with it; and that their accounts, particularly with regard to the Affyrian empire, do not agree with the accounts given of it in Scripture. And yet he himfelf has taken great pains to fhew, that the ancient Greeks were fabulous writers, and that their accounts of ancient times, either with regard to other nations, or their own, are not to be depended on: and accordingly he hath let us know, that if they had perfeftly agreed with the accounts given in the Jewish Scriptures, he would have had very little regard to them, and would not have looked upon this to be any argument of their truth. Many Icarned writers have produced teftimonies from heathen authors, tending to ftrengthen fome remarkable paffages in the fcripture hiftory. This his Lordship finds great fault with, and chargeth it as a moft partial and abfurd conduct to admit the teftimony of the heathen writers, if they happen at any time to agree with the fcripture accounts, and to reject their teftimony when against them. But if the matter be fairly weighed, there is nothing in this but what is very reasonable: for, confidering the frong prejudices of the heathens against the Jews, whofe whole religion and policy were fo opposite to theirs, it is evident that no great ftrefs can be laid upon what they fay against them, and their history; and yet if any thing be found in their writings, which tendeth to confirm the facts recorded in the Jewish facred books, it is juft to take advantage of this; fince it is plain this could not be owing to a favourable prepoffeffion towards the Jews, or their hiftories, but to the force of truth, or to fome traditions which they looked upon as authentic. For though the teftimonies of enemics are not much to be regarded, when they are to the prejudice of thofe for whom they have a declared averfion, yet the teftimony of enemies in favour of thofe to whom they are known to be enemies, has been always looked upon to be of great weight,

In order to invalidate the fcripture hiftory, his Lordship has thought fit to repeat what had been often mentioned by the writers on that fide: That the Jewish facred books were loft in the Babylonifh captivity; that there have been fuch corruptions and alterations in the copies, that there can be no dependence upon them; that there is no proof of the Gospels having been written in the apoftolic age; that they were not diftinguifhed from the fpurious gofpels; that there had been formerly evidence against Christianity, but that it was deftroyed; that the Christian clergy, through whofe hands the Scripturės have been transmitted to us, were guilty of numberlefs frauds and corruptions; and that the many differences among Chriftians about the fenfe of Scripture fhew, that it is abfolutely uncertain; and that there is now no certain ftandard of Chriftianity at all. Thefe and other objections, which his Lordship hath difplayed with no fmall oftentation, I fhall not here take any particular notice of, having confidered and obviated them in the Reflections on Lord Bolingbroke's Letters on the Study and Ufe of Hiftory, especially as far as they relate to Chriftianity and the Holy Scriptures, publifhed at London, 8vo. 1753*. About the fame time, the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of Clogher published A Vindication of the Hiftories of the Old and New Teftament, in Anfwer to the Objections of the late Lord Bolingbroke: in which he hath both detected and expofed feveral mistakes his Lordship had fallen into with respect to other ancient authors whom he cites, and hath vindicated the facred writings against the attempts made in thofe Letters to invalidate their credit and divine authority.Thefe, with Mr. Harvey's Remarks on Lord Bolingbroke's Letters, as far as they relate to the Hiftory of the Old Testament, arc the only anfwers I have feen to his Lordship's Letters on the Study and Ufe of Hiftory. But we fhall foon have occasion to return to this noble Lord, who afterwards in his pofthumous works appeared fill more openly against the Chriftian caufe, and even against what have been hitherto accounted fome of the most important principles of natural religion.

*Thefe Reflections are to be found in the fecond volume of this work, to which the reader is referred.

LET.

Mr. Hume, a fubtile and ingenious Writer, but extremely fceptical and fond of Novelty-He propofes to free Metaphyfics from that Jargon and Obfcurity which has ferved only as a Shelter to Superftition and Error-His Dodrine concerning the Relation of Caufe and Effect examined-He declares, that the Knowledge of this Relation is of the highest Importance, and that all our Reafons concerning Matter of Fact and Experience, and concerning the Existence of any Being, are founded upon it-Yet he fets himself to fhew, that there is no real Connexion between Cafe and Effect, and that there can be no certain, nor even probable, Reafoning from the one to the other-Reflections upon the great Abfurdity and pernicious Confequences of this Scheme-The Inconfiftencies this Writer hath fallen into.

I

SIR,

NOW fend

you fome obfervations upon Mr. Hume, an ingenious writer, who hath lately appeared against the Chriftian caufe, and that in a manner which feems to have something new in it, and different from what others had written before him, efpecially in what he calls his Philofophical Effays concerning Human Understanding. The fecond edition of this book, with additions and corrections, which is what I have now before me, was published in London, 1750. This gentleman must be acknowledged to be a fubtile writer, of a very metaphyfical genius, and has a neat and agreeable manner of expreffion. But it is obvious to every judicious reader, that he hath in many inftances carried fcepticism to an unreasonable height; and feemeth everywhere to affect an air of making new obfervations and difcoveries. His writings feem, for the moft part, to be calculated rather to amufe, or even confound, than to inftruct and enlighten the understanding; and there are not a few things in them, which frike at the foundation of natural, as well as the proofs and evidences of revealed, religion. This appeareth to me to be, in a particular manner, the character of his Philofophical Effays:

and